if you lack at fracking, most people would feel their economy is much stronger than the rest of america, people are willing to pay a premium. when you look at cullen frost, it's much like northern and goldman sachs that people want to go to. and i like conservative names with strong dividend growth with strong regional economic situations that never took t.a.r.p.. conversely, you look at the money-centered banks that all of them took t.a.r.p., all have risk-oriented assets with europe, i don't believe anybody can ascertain or truly understand. i think there's more risk with these names. i like companies like u.s. bank, very strong management, very conservative in their lending power. and i think they know their customers better. liz: and that one, sorry to interrupt, has a 2.3% dividend, it's up about 5% over the past year, pe 9. >> right. liz: i'm just wondering why i wouldn't go with, say, a jpmorgan or a goldman sachs when, you know, some of these smaller names have exposure to, perhaps, downdrafts, and they might get blown around a little more dramatically if there are issues. >> ri